Law Commons^™

The Pattern Requirement Of Civil Rico, Jamie Middleton Clark

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Retribution And Deterrence: The Role Of Punitive Damages In Products Liability Litigation, Richard C. Ausness

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, John R. Leathers, Matthew L. Mooney

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Discovery In Kentucky: An Overview, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Discovery receives short shrift in the law school curriculum. Although students are introduced to the subject in a first year course on Civil Procedure, the "bathtub effect" usually takes its toll by graduation day. That is, after the first year, the plug is pulled and the student's knowledge drains away. Moreover, it is difficult to teach discovery in third year programs on trial advocacy. Too much emphasis on discovery and pretrial would leave too little time for instruction on the mechanics of the actual trial. Even the experienced practitioner may not remember all the intricacies of discovery and may find …

Discovery In Kentucky: An Overview, Richard H. Underwood

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Discovery Of Nonparties' Tangible Things Under The Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure, Sarah N. Welling

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 26 through 37 describe procedures for pretrial discovery. While one may employ all the methods of discovery against parties, discovery methods for nonparties are much more limited. For example, with the exception of the independent action under subdivision (c), the procedures detailed in Federal Rule 34 regarding production of tangible things do not apply to nonparties. Frequently, though, a litigant must discover tangible things in the possession, custody, or control of a nonparty. Although the federal rules do provide alternative methods for the discovery of nonparties' things, the whole discovery scheme for nonparties is rather …

Legal Ethics And Class Actions: Problems, Tactics And Judicial Responses, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Perhaps no procedural innovation has generated more controversy than the class action. As Professor Arthur Miller has observed, debate over “class action problem[s]” has raged at several different levels. For example, opponents and proponents of class actions disagree on whether such actions produce socially desirable results in an economical fashion and whether an already overburdened judiciary can handle the additional supervisory demands of the class action. Recently, a somewhat more ideological dialogue has addressed the merit of publicly funded class actions. Such questions arise only indirectly in the context of class action litigation. However, a certain hostility toward class actions …

Discovery Of Government Attorney Work Product Under The Foia, Richard Allen Vance

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, John R. Leathers

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Curbing Litigation Abuses: Judicial Control Of Adversary Ethics—The Model Rules Of Professional Conduct And Proposed Amendments To The Rules Of Civil Procedure, Richard H. Underwood

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This Article addresses the effectiveness of recent developments and proposals related to abusive litigation, and discusses them in the context of recent opinions illustrating the power of the trial judge to control the excesses of the adversary system. It rejects the countersuit as a time-consuming and costly means of controlling litigation abuses, and concludes that “tinkering changes” in the rules of procedure cannot bring about true reform. It is urged here that the burden resulting from abuse of litigation can only be relieved by changes which foster stronger judicial control of adversarial ethics, and greater judicial involvement in the pretrial …

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, John R. Leathers

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, John R. Leathers, Roxane M. Tomasi, Jeffrey B. Hunt

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Voir Dire In Kentucky: An Empirical Study Of Voir Dire In Kentucky Circuit Courts, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Voir dire is the stage of a jury trial at which prospective jurors are questioned under oath by court or counsel to determine their suitability as jurors in the case to be tried. Kentucky's high court has repeatedly recognized the importance of voir dire to the exercise of for-cause and peremptory challenges.

The trial judge's wide discretion in voir dire, however, necessarily makes a review of appellate decisions of minimal assistance in ascertaining what actually occurs during this important phase of a jury trial. Published opinions provide little guidance in this area; information about voir dire must come from a …

Causation As A Standing Requirement: The Unprincipled Use Of Judicial Restraint, Gene R. Nichol Jr.

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, John H. Garvey, Beth Pederson Doutt

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

A Way Out Of The Social Security Jurisdiction Tangle, John M. Rogers

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

When Congress recently eliminated the $10,000 amount-in-controversy requirement for federal question jurisdiction in suits against the United States, its agencies, and its officers, Congress effectively resolved, for most cases, the problem of finding subject matter jurisdiction for federal judicial review of federal administrative agency action. Whatever the resolution of such distinct issues as whether there is a cause of action, whether sovereign immunity is waived, and whether administrative remedies have been exhausted, subject matter jurisdiction, at least, will be provided, if nowhere else, by the amended federal question jurisdiction statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1331. The applicability of section 1331, however, …

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, John H. Garvey, Bill Dorris

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Manageability Of Class Actions Under S. 3475: Congress Confronts The Policy Choices Revealed In Rule 23(B)(3) Litigation, James R. Lyons Jr.

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, William S. Cooper

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Chapters Of The Civil Jury, Doug Rendleman

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, John R. Leathers

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

This article provides a survey of civil procedure developments in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. The most significant civil procedure case decided by the Kentucky Court of Appeals during the period covered by this Survey is Nazareth Literary and Benevolent Institution v. Stephenson. That case, which deals with discovery of privileged communications, may have created problems that will require legislative action. Other decisions by the Court during this period serve to illustrate and amplify existing procedural points. The more important of these decisions will be briefly discussed prior to the consideration of Stephenson.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, William H. Fortune

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Kentucky Law Survey: Civil Procedure, Howard W. L'Enfant

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Pendent Jurisdiction - The Problem Of "Pendenting Parties", William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

Federal courts have generally discouraged the joinder of a third party solely on the basis of a claim pendent to a federal cause of action. They have, however, been more liberal in allowing joinder in diversity cases. The author reviews the case law and argues that a more liberal attitude toward joinder should be adopted, except in diversity cases where, he believes, liberal joinder erodes the requirement of complete diversity.

Venue Of Civil Actions In Kentucky, William H. Fortune

Law Faculty Scholarly Articles

The purpose of this paper is primarily to analyze Kentucky’s venue statutes, and secondarily to suggest the path to reform. The paper is divided into four parts. Part I is a brief history of the confusion in Kentucky between jurisdiction and venue. Some exposure to this history is essential to an understanding of the older cases, which in some areas are the only cases in point. Part II is an analysis of the four major venue statutes in KRS Chapter 454: KRS § 452.400—actions involving land; KRS § 452.450-actions against corporations; KRS § 452.460—actions for personal injury or property damage; …

Venue Of Civil Actions In Kentucky, William H. Fortune

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

The Law Of The Case Doctrine In Kentucky, Michael Mcgraw

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Federal Rules Of Civil Procedure--Ancillary Jurisdiction--Third-Party Defendant's Counterclaim Against Plaintiff Without An Independent Basis Of Federal Jurisdiction, W. Stokes Harris Jr.

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.

Civil Procedure--Federal Rule 23--Aggregation Of Claims, Steve Hixson

Kentucky Law Journal

No abstract provided.